Swindon - facilities, improvements, signalling, events and incidents, including GWR history - merged posts

[whole diary]

[ChrisB]

yup, I've voted. :-)

[JayMac]

A final bit of canvassing on my part. I think The Swindon Panel Society would really appreciate the ^500 being offered by RailUK. Swindon Panel is a little different from the usual preservation appeals that go on in the railway heritage sector.

The vote closes on 17th November 2014 at 00:18. Any members here, who are embers over at RailUK, please do vote.

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=108104

[John R]

I've voted too for the Panel.

[JayMac]

Swindon Panel missed out by one vote! 

At least 50 votes, by my reckoning, were excluded with a retrospectively added rule that new members with a zero post count were ineligible to vote. A very real danger of accusations of rigging for doing that. I've certainly expressed my disappointment at the removal of a fair number of votes. 

[grahame]

Swindon Panel missed out by one vote! 

At least 50 votes, by my reckoning, were excluded with a retrospectively added rule that new members with a zero post count were ineligible to vote. A very real danger of accusations of rigging for doing that. I've certainly expressed my disappointment at the removal of a fair number of votes. 

* Logic suggests that there would have been a different winner had there not been a last minute rule change - otherwise there would have been no point in going to the trouble of changing the rules.

* If a vote with a substantive outcome such as this one has a problem, the fair convention is to declare it null and void and to rerun the vote with the problem / rules sorted.

* I am a little surprised that who voted for what is published, and the voting isn't secret.

Railforums has left itself open to accusations of vote rigging, and of running a vote in which peer pressure takes a role that it shouldn't.  Reminds me of a recent local test of opinion ... several comments of "I support your 'yes', Graham, but I dare not say so in public because the 'no' leader is part of my close business community".

Congratulations to the Loughborough Gap project; it will be interesting to see if they accept the money or ask for the vote to be rerun in these circumstances. Although Swindon Panel came second, we should not come to any foregone conclusion that it's that project that would have won without the rules being changed after voting.

[grahame]

Following up on my own post, there has been considerable activity on the other forum on this topic.  Hindsight is a marvellous thing ... and they appear to have sorted things out which looked rather ugly and perhaps unfair yesterday morning.

I'm somewhat re-assured by the statement that the extra votes which were discounted were for none of the top three projects; it seems like they accounted for some 20% of the votes and brought a project which had little support from the regulars out on top.  And there is a suggestion that the sign-up-to-vote elements weren't genuine.  But only somewhat re-assured; a vote such as this should help encourage new posters (one of our prize competitions was won by someone who signed up to take part ... and has since become a regular, occasionally-posting member) and voting should be secret - not only for the people who vote, but also for the members who choose not to vote and so don't appear on the lists.

Contrary to my post as this developed, I now feel that it's reasonable for the Loughborough folks to accept the forum's donation without considering it to be seriously tainted money.   We seem to have moved from a possible "rigged vote" scenario to one that's had its problems, but seems reasonably fair in outcome.

[John R]

I think it was a reasonable action to take when it became clear that there was an element of vote rigging going on, but it might have been better had the rules been changed once that became clear.  Remember that the people running Nat Pres are (I presume) volunteers, have day jobs, and set up the competition in good faith not being experts on ballots. It was clear that some people were looking to take advantage of that lack of expertise, and so it was right to block them.

[Chris from Nailsea]

It seems to me that the Swindon Panel Preservation project can take heart from the fact that two moderators and two administrators on RailUK Forums voted for them - a very good level of moral support, even though they were ultimately pipped by just that one vote! 

[patch38]

From BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) Wiltshire

Plans have been unveiled to replace an underpass, known as a place for muggings, with a safer footbridge.

In recent years, several violent crimes have been committed in the underpass, which links Station Road and the Oasis Leisure Centre, in Swindon.

A Swindon Borough Council spokesman said a bid for government cash would be needed for the ^10m project.

Last June a man was stabbed to death in the area and earlier this week a woman was sexually assaulted.

An attempted robbery and an assault on a woman also took place in the pass, which runs under the railway line, last year.
'Wider benefits'

A council spokesman said: "We want to put a pedestrian bridge across the rail line to connect North Star with the town centre but getting it built is linked to the wider regeneration of that area.

"The cost of building a bridge will be in excess of ^10m, so we will need to put in a bid to central government for the money and show the wider benefits it will bring.

"We won't get funding for that amount simply because a bridge would be safer for users than an underpass - we have to show other reasons as well."

Conservative MP^▸ (Member of Parliament) for North Swindon, Justin Tomlinson, said: "This should be a thing of the past.

"As part of the town centre regeneration we would be better off having a pedestrian bridge with visibility and access," he said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-30792901

[Chris from Nailsea]

Thanks for posting, patch38. 

Selected from that particular BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) news item:

Plans to replace Swindon 'muggings' underpass



A council spokesman said: "The cost of building a bridge will be in excess of ^10m ... We won't get funding for that amount simply because a bridge would be safer for users than an underpass - we have to show other reasons as well."

How much?? 

[LiskeardRich]

^10m for a footbridge?       

[Electric train]

Use to be the canal, my guess they want to put an over bridge in.

^10M don't get you much nowerdays

[ellendune]

It would have to have quite a long approach ramp as the railway is on an embankment. Also it would need to be quite wide to ensure it was not just as hazardous as the underpass.

[bobm]

This is the town centre end of the underpass



As has been said you would need quite a high footbridge to clear the railway - even more so with electrification in prospect.

It is part of National Cycleway 45 so I would hope cyclists would be accommodated and not faced with "Cyclists please dismount" signs.

[grahame]

What to the Wilts and Berks Canal Trust think?    This is the former North Wilts Canal and although the Wilts and Berks when re-opened will avoid the town centre by quite a way, plans I have seen bring one leg into the town and then head off up the North Wilts, under that bridge again, up to Latton / the River Thames.

I'm not an architect, and my imagination of a great monstrosity rising from the ground on both sides and then crossing above the electric wires leaves me open-mouthed in awe.  Is that really needed?  I look at the solution at the next underpass along to the west, which is patrolled.  And the next public under crossing to the east which is shared with road traffic and becomes very much too busy (as I understand it) to have the same crime problems, even if it has the extra problem of bridge strikes.